Heat shrink tubing comes in various shrink ratios. The most common of which is 2:1, but there are also 3:1, 4:1 and higher. Assuming cost is the same, are there any disadvantages or consideration points when using higher ratios?
\$\begingroup\$
\$\endgroup\$
1
-
\$\begingroup\$ "assuming the cost is the same" I wish it was \$\endgroup\$– Mark OmoCommented Sep 11, 2018 at 16:10
Add a comment
|
2 Answers
\$\begingroup\$
\$\endgroup\$
3
One small disadvantage I've found is that the wall of a high shrink ratio tube can get quite thick when shrunk.
If your joint has some small diameter sections then the high ratio tube might shrink all the way, conforming tightly to the wire, and become quite stiff compared to a 2:1 tube.
There's also a problem of asymmetry. If the shrink-er doesn't use an air deflector or turn the joint while heating it, one side of the tube will shrink first, making it asymmetrical. A 2:1 tube suffers less from this as it can't go so wrong.
-
11\$\begingroup\$ The increased stiffness can also be a blessing in certain situations. \$\endgroup\$– pipeCommented Sep 11, 2018 at 7:55
-
-
11\$\begingroup\$ @Criggie For example if you use heat shrink tubing around a solder joint between two wires you can get some amount of strain relief if the tubing is stiff. Or between a wire and a pin header: ni.com/cms/images/devzone/tut/image6391225987748786482.png \$\endgroup\$– pipeCommented Sep 11, 2018 at 12:38
\$\begingroup\$
\$\endgroup\$
I tried some 6:1 once, it was horrible, it was thick as heck even before shrinking took a heck of a lot of heat to shrinking and was ridiculously thick once shrunk, would not recommend.
On the other hand 2:1 is painfully low IMO. It makes it difficult to select a size that is large enough to go over the components, yet small enough to grip well after shrinking.
I tend to feel 3:1 is the sweet spot.
